View Post [edit]
Poster: | garthus | Date: | Apr 14, 2010 5:30am |
Forum: | texts | Subject: | Re: Is Adobe Flash going to be redundant? |
Yes but these things have a habit of boxing one in. Here in the US , we have cable television, 172 channels mostly of crap. Why should I pay $120 per month to watch crap and maybe 2-3 good shows? The technology is here to allow us to pay for exactly what we want/use; I am willing to do that.
Gerry
Reply [edit]
Poster: | Time Traveller | Date: | Apr 19, 2010 10:11pm |
Forum: | texts | Subject: | Re: Is Adobe Flash going to be redundant? |
But, seeing the crap on the 172 channels is very cheap to purchase, dont expect much of a saving when you get just what you want to view.
Reply [edit]
Poster: | garthus | Date: | Apr 22, 2010 5:52am |
Forum: | texts | Subject: | Re: Is Adobe Flash going to be redundant? |
We in the land of the free (fredom to be degenerate, morally corrupt and paedaphilic_) are not allowed to purchase subscriber television.
Gerry
Reply [edit]
Poster: | Time Traveller | Date: | Apr 22, 2010 9:58pm |
Forum: | texts | Subject: | Re: Is Adobe Flash going to be redundant? |
It mentions SKY TV in the UK.
There Sky offered bundled channels, then round about 1996 the UK regulators made a law forcing SKY to allow pick and mix, and no more packages of channels.
There SKY did the transmission from satellite on behalf of other companies too, SKY did the billing for those companies too.
I did a quick check on Wikipedia for British SKY and what happen after they were forced to sell pick and mix of channels, and no more pick and mix of bundles of channels.
I found no reference, but I only had a few minutes. Maybe you would have more luck?
Reply [edit]
Poster: | garthus | Date: | Apr 23, 2010 6:04am |
Forum: | texts | Subject: | Re: Is Adobe Flash going to be redundant? |
I think thy were bought out by another company several years ago.
Gerry
Reply [edit]
Poster: | Time Traveller | Date: | Apr 23, 2010 8:02pm |
Forum: | texts | Subject: | Re: Is Adobe Flash going to be redundant? |
I only watch TV news, everything else is DVD hired on line, send to me fast post (overnight)
I use my satellite Free View MAINLY for perfect National Radio Concert Program, running in the background 24/7, but the Government due to the recession won't provide extra funding for cost increases, so it wont be a all nighter, or there will be advertising soon.
Reply [edit]
Poster: | Time Traveller | Date: | Apr 22, 2010 10:09pm |
Forum: | texts | Subject: | Re: Is Adobe Flash going to be redundant? |
Interesting question, who are the regulators protecting in your free market society?
Peter
Reply [edit]
Poster: | garthus | Date: | Apr 23, 2010 6:05am |
Forum: | texts | Subject: | Re: Is Adobe Flash going to be redundant? |
The very peopel whom I was refrring to.
Gerry
Reply [edit]
Poster: | Time Traveller | Date: | Apr 23, 2010 8:47pm |
Forum: | texts | Subject: | Re: Is Adobe Flash going to be redundant? |
So vote with your feet.
Go and live in a Dictatorship where you pay off just one guy.
Why no female dictators?
Reply [edit]
Poster: | Time Traveller | Date: | Apr 14, 2010 4:42pm |
Forum: | texts | Subject: | Re: Is Adobe Flash going to be redundant? |
There is a minimum cost for the cable infrastructure, thus its very little extra to put up 172 channels.
Believe it or not, other people enjoy what to you and me is crap, (and vice-versa) Most of those people would not understand the stuff you and me enjoy.
But without these people paying their share of the infrastructure, it would cost much much more to provide you with just the 4 channels you enjoy.
Think of those extra channels as freebies as the infrastructure is already paid for.
The real problem is, there is a great shortage of quantity programming, due to piracy fewer people want to risk venture capital in producing quantity movies and documentaries.
And your model, where there is no more copyright and people produce works of art only for love, wont improve matters at all.
Arthur Haiely (Hotel, Airport, The Money Changers, etc.) and Tom Clancy did/do write top best sellers, but the writing was only after they put a lot of time into research, Haily worked in each industry he wrote about, Clanecy visited defence department bases and weapons manufacturers.
BTW Did you know that Clive Cusselor gets his technology ideas for his thriller novels from Popular Mechanics and popular Science Magazines? I have noted the seemingly coincidence more than 3 times now, and you know that means its no a coincidence the third time. (and there's been a fourth..)
Reply [edit]
Poster: | garthus | Date: | Apr 14, 2010 7:38pm |
Forum: | texts | Subject: | Re: Is Adobe Flash going to be redundant? |
Gerry
Reply [edit]
Poster: | Time Traveller | Date: | Apr 14, 2010 9:04pm |
Forum: | texts | Subject: | Re: Is Adobe Flash going to be redundant? |
This post was modified by Time Traveller on 2010-04-15 04:04:34
Reply [edit]
Poster: | soundoff | Date: | Apr 17, 2010 8:09am |
Forum: | texts | Subject: | Re: Is Adobe Flash going to be redundant? |
Not to butt in but the problem isn't sharing, the question is ownership. If i sell you my car that car is yours to do with what you please. But if I buy a DVD i cannot, charge money for others to see it, even though its mine. The truth is if you sell an item to the public then you should lose your rights to protect it, you are in fact selling your rights away at that time for profit now, instead of later down the line. This is the case if the artist sells his rights to another, and thats what they really do when the get paid huge amounts of money to make a movie or write a book, it should be compensated on the deal not later on material you have sold to the private sector who should by all rights own all aspects of the item in question. Copyrights are a fictitious claim to a product the Creator has in most cases already been paid for, and if not then the copyrights should exist until the owner sells them in some way to the new owner. the claim that I sell you food so your waste is mine is a bogus and unrealistic endeavor and fodder for lawyers and the bureaucracies. Should an artist who paints a picture be able to stop the buyer of said picture to paint over it?
Reply [edit]
Poster: | garthus | Date: | Apr 17, 2010 4:09pm |
Forum: | texts | Subject: | Re: Is Adobe Flash going to be redundant? |
Well said'
Gerry
Reply [edit]
Poster: | Time Traveller | Date: | Apr 17, 2010 9:25pm |
Forum: | texts | Subject: | Re: Is Adobe Flash going to be redundant? |
Who is going to make movies like Star Trek, Sherlock Holmes, Sheik etc, if there is no money to pay the actors, producers, writers, technicians camera men, cleaners carpenters stuntmen etc? These same people go out and buy food, homes, cars, travel keeping other people in employment etc PROVIDED somebody had paid them to produce the movie.
What you are suggesting Gerry, is pretty close to the communist business model, and how many block buster movies did they turn out, before they saw the light, and look at what it did to their economy.
If people dont get paid for their works of art, even people producing works of art as a collective, they will stop producing, and find work elsewhere, otherwise they will quickly be homeless and hungry.
If it was possible for anybody to duplicate a car, pretty quickly you would only be able to licence the use of a car from the manufacturer and no longer be able to pay for the ownership.
I am sorry, I see no way around it, no matter have much I would like block buster movies for free, if people dont get paid for their work, then they will stop working, and do something else that does pay enough to put food on their tables in their homes.
Gerry, if you weren't paid, how long will you continue doing your computer administration job, which includes a form of work of art too?
Elsewhere you talk about the "crap" that fills 99% of your cable TV channels, if the producers did not get paid enough for the time and resources making the videos, no wonder you get crap, and of the other 1%, how long will that continue if they dont get paid?
Okay, you want less crap, you must then pay more for you cable subscription.
More importantly Gerry, if you were the computer administrator for a film studio, what would you do if management told all the employees (including you)that the studio WAS going to continue turning out block busters for the Cable Television Providers and DVD Distributors, but was going to abide by the wishes of the people of the world, and no longer putting a copyright on your work, that once the block buster is finished, its in the Public Domain for anybody to do with as they please, including uploading to the Internet Archive for anybody to download and do with as they please, including further distribution, including burning to DVD for those without WWW access, and for public showing for those without DVD players?
Be honest Gerry, while I do sort of see your point of view, what would you do, as computer administrator for the film studio that tells you, you wont get paid any more cash apart from as many free copies as you like of the public domain block buster movies you help turn out, BUT show up as usual in the morning to begin your 8 plus, hours of work like you always have done.
Be honest Gerry so we can have a useful discussion that might lead to answers that will enable your point of view to become the new business model for film studios.
Reply [edit]
Poster: | garthus | Date: | Apr 19, 2010 7:34am |
Forum: | texts | Subject: | Re: Is Adobe Flash going to be redundant? |
This post was modified by garthus on 2010-04-19 14:34:22
Reply [edit]
Poster: | Time Traveller | Date: | Apr 19, 2010 10:15pm |
Forum: | texts | Subject: | Re: Is Adobe Flash going to be redundant? |
If Oprah got 90 Billion per year, its only because people WILL be watching her.
She must bringing in more than that for the network, more than than that for the advertisers that buy advertising space around her.
Give up all your Cable TV etc, and just buy legal DVD movies direct from the movie maker's distributors.
Cut out all the middle men who add their costs and profits just for doing the paper pushing.
Reply [edit]
Poster: | garthus | Date: | Apr 22, 2010 5:48am |
Forum: | texts | Subject: | Re: Is Adobe Flash going to be redundant? |
You are missing my point. I do not watch any movies for enterainment. Never really did, and can live without them. Just because you think people are agreeing to pay for something which is a creation of a morally and intellectually corrupt government, does not make it right. Winfry gets the money she gets because of the corruption inherent in a system which allows her (with very little intellect) to monopolize th so-called entertainment profession. This is not a way to run a country, as we will soon find out.
Gerry
Reply [edit]
Poster: | Time Traveller | Date: | Apr 22, 2010 10:11pm |
Forum: | texts | Subject: | Re: Is Adobe Flash going to be redundant? |
Its an off shoot of supply and demand, she is only popular because so many people think so, therefore she makes heaps of money.
Gerry, you are one of the Minority that dont like her.
Gerry, I am the second one of the Minority that dont like her.
Gerry, we are out numbered.
AND your government can not interfere on OUR side.
I suppose you have the 172 channels of TV, just for the news then?
Reply [edit]
Poster: | garthus | Date: | Dec 20, 2011 8:16pm |
Forum: | texts | Subject: | Re: Is Adobe Flash going to be redundant? |
This post was modified by garthus on 2011-12-21 04:16:03
Reply [edit]
Poster: | Time Traveller | Date: | Apr 23, 2010 8:43pm |
Forum: | texts | Subject: | Re: Is Adobe Flash going to be redundant? |
Hey, maybe you and me dont like her, but millions do, otherwise the advertisers would not invest in her TV appearances.
If she earns millions, SOMEBODY likes her?
And hey, is her style copyrighted?
Reply [edit]
Poster: | Time Traveller | Date: | Apr 17, 2010 10:16pm |
Forum: | texts | Subject: | Re: Is Adobe Flash going to be redundant? |
This post was modified by Time Traveller on 2010-04-18 05:16:06
Reply [edit]
Poster: | garthus | Date: | Apr 19, 2010 7:34am |
Forum: | texts | Subject: | Re: Is Adobe Flash going to be redundant? |
Also, I provide a tangible service unlike derelict movie stars and politicians who are merely parasites on the body politic.
Gerry
Reply [edit]
Poster: | Time Traveller | Date: | Apr 20, 2010 1:07am |
Forum: | texts | Subject: | Re: Is Adobe Flash going to be redundant? |
Would you continue as computer administrator with a movie studio, if management told all staff, that here on in, the studio was no longer copyrighting the block busters it turned out, but releasing them into the public domain on their opening day, for all to freely copy left right, centre and upside down and freely distribute world wide, including the Space Station.
That therefore, here on in, you would no longer be paid for your work, but still expected to show up for work as usual or you would be in breach of contract.
Gerry, I am not talking about any highly paid person at the studio, I am ONLY asking about YOU as the studio's computer administrator.
Don't change the question please Gerry!
Would you stay and work for free to back up your belief that copyrights should be abolished and people should help create works of art just for the love of it, rather than money?
Peter Lateral Thinker
Reply [edit]
Poster: | garthus | Date: | Apr 22, 2010 5:57am |
Forum: | texts | Subject: | Re: Is Adobe Flash going to be redundant? |
I would never be in that position since I would have never signed such a contract in the first play. My job entails real value added, not some Winfry-like virtual value which has no basis in the real world other than extortion.
Gerry
Reply [edit]
Poster: | Time Traveller | Date: | Apr 22, 2010 9:52pm |
Forum: | texts | Subject: | Re: Is Adobe Flash going to be redundant? |
I dont care if you would not have signed such a contract.
Once again, would you work UNPAID for a movie studio, so it can release its block buster movie into the public domain on opening day?
You advocate for abolishment of copy rights, saying people should produce works of art just for the love of it.
You forget people have to eat.
THEREFORE once again, would you work UNPAID for a movie studio, so it can release its block buster movie into the public domain on opening day?
Peter
Reply [edit]
Poster: | garthus | Date: | Apr 23, 2010 6:02am |
Forum: | texts | Subject: | Re: Is Adobe Flash going to be redundant? |
Given those contract trms; yes I would.
Gerry
Reply [edit]
Poster: | Time Traveller | Date: | Apr 23, 2010 7:57pm |
Forum: | texts | Subject: | Re: Is Adobe Flash going to be redundant? |
THEREFORE once again, would you work UNPAID for a movie studio, so it can release its block buster movie into the public domain on opening day?
How are you going to pay for food, power WWW access and your 120 channels of TV then?
Our phones are out for 24 plus hours due to a software issue in a number of exchanges controlled by a central computer, they can not even forward my land line calls to mobile, but they got voice mail back, which comes thru to mobile
Reply [edit]
Poster: | garthus | Date: | Apr 15, 2010 9:03pm |
Forum: | texts | Subject: | Re: Is Adobe Flash going to be redundant? |
Just reread your message. No, I could care less about quality cable, just the connection, and that is not subsidized by the movie industry; if anything phone rates have come down as a result of the internet service. Copyright likewise does not stimulate the production of better artwork. Creative people do that. I am working on a book which I posted the first chapter of; could care less about selling it; all copyrights in their present form do is to interfere with my production of such works. Actually I understand quite a bit about how the communications industry works and believe me it could survive quite well without the sheeple cultivating motion picture and entertainment industry. In any case they will all be gone when people like me start producing intelligent machines which will not require such useless crap. See:
http://www.archive.org/details/Zoe_A_Story_Of_Honor_Betrayal_And_Redemption_
Gerry
Reply [edit]
Poster: | Time Traveller | Date: | Apr 16, 2010 2:32am |
Forum: | texts | Subject: | Re: Is Adobe Flash going to be redundant? |
Reply [edit]
Poster: | coolpolitealex | Date: | Apr 19, 2010 7:17pm |
Forum: | texts | Subject: | Re: Is Adobe Flash going to be redundant? |
So paying a nominal fee upfront' does more good than harm. but i know America is schitzophrenic about public and private,since Churchill gave the "iron curtain speech" but get over the prejudice of the cold war' and except" spreading out all the money of the public sector, and allowing the real talent to come out on the top without having to write rubbish just to survive,as there are plenty of un-talented writers out there' being paid to write rubbish.
Reply [edit]
Poster: | Time Traveller | Date: | Apr 19, 2010 9:11pm |
Forum: | texts | Subject: | Re: Is Adobe Flash going to be redundant? |
They never lasted.
However, the BBC is funded by complusery TV licenses, every household in the UK with a TV has to pay this annual license.
When TV free to air came to NZ in the '60s the funding was based on both the UK and USA models, seeing there was just 2.6 million people here then, (I think its about 4 million plus now) every household paid its annual TV license, which included the radio licence fee, carried over from before we had TV, PLUS the government channels had advertising, maybe 15 minutes maximum per hour, none on Sunday.
We had just 2 channels up to the early '70s when we went colour. Both were Government owned/operated, but they led to the demise of movie theatres in most small towns.
Then private networks were allowed, and the licence fee abolished. We now have TV1 and TV2 networks from the Government, TV3 a private general network AND C4 mostly a music video network, Prime, a general network, free to terrestrial air until recently and owned by Sky, the TAB channel, horse racing owned by a Betting Commission, A Maori Channel as well.
Also one local channel in most areas, mostly running old stuff, Mr Ed, and the Hillbillies.
All channels/networks are now advertising funded, only 4,000,000 possible viewers, the advertisers pay less, so to break even, we get more advertising that TV shows.
The Government via "NZ on Air" subsidises the marking of NZ TV shows, otherwise we would not have any, one "Shortland Street" a soap based on a Accident and Emergency Clinic has been running 20-years, it is self supporting now, and its being exported.
Most of our viewing is CRAP, as Gerry would say, to make decent TV shows takes big bucks, the more HD TV goes, the more a show costs, now its 3D and interactive.
Not just NZ, but world wide, there is a lack of quality TV shows and movies, thus we get heaps of game shows (prizes given by the advertisings) make over shows, reality shows, cooking, etc, all very cheap to make.
Honestly, there is not even enough new content produced world wide to supply ONE network.
Without copyright, networks would rip each other off, thus if they did, nobody would pay for decent shows to be made any-more.
I think Cable TV, including similar is on the way out.
Replacing it, there will be free to air of only news shows, and public broadcasting (Like we have a Free View satilight channel of our Parliament (A comedy with their horseplay while supposed working for us making laws)
And people can order whatever show they like, from a vast file server, pay per view, fed down your phone line.
And if lots of people chose premium shows and pay for it, then more high quality shows will be turned out.
If somebody pirates these moves, quickly the source will dry up.
And stopping movie makers from copyrighting their latest movie, is in effect legalising piracy and quickly the supply of new block busters will dry up.
Finally, there reason there is so much crap on TV, and very little quantity stuff, is due to piracy, the pirates selling stollen property.
If there was no piracy, no file sharing, no DVD burners, you can bet there will be lots of quality shows being produced because the people doing the work will be paid.
And the cost of a legal copy of a Movie is high because each legal copy has to recover the losses of all the pirated copies.
Reply [edit]
Poster: | Time Traveller | Date: | Apr 19, 2010 10:00pm |
Forum: | texts | Subject: | Re: Is Adobe Flash going to be redundant? |
For infrastructure, everybody pays the same amount, thus fewer customers means customers might not be located so close together thus each customer left, pays more to get cable delivered.
Then the cost of block buster movies and documentaries, if the producers get ripped off be cable viewers recording these block busters and on selling, them the producers will demand (and get)a very high payment from the Cable Provider for a licence to show the Block Buster just once, because both Movie Maker and Cable Provider now that a week after first showing, there will be 1000s of pirated copies, and nobody will pay for legal copies again.
Reply [edit]
Poster: | garthus | Date: | Apr 22, 2010 5:56am |
Forum: | texts | Subject: | Re: Is Adobe Flash going to be redundant? |
This sounds good with me, but not the way it works.
Gerry
Reply [edit]
Poster: | Time Traveller | Date: | Apr 22, 2010 10:17pm |
Forum: | texts | Subject: | Re: Is Adobe Flash going to be redundant? |
but that is how piracy is ruining the system.
Okay, when people dont get paid, no more block buster movies.
No such content on Cable TV, no more Cable TV.
People have to eat, therefore they wont work for carrot slices. (Carrot Slices====used to hear that from my Dutch parents, meaning fake or imaginary gold coins)
Reply [edit]
Poster: | garthus | Date: | Apr 23, 2010 6:08am |
Forum: | texts | Subject: | Re: Is Adobe Flash going to be redundant? |
Gerry
Reply [edit]
Poster: | Time Traveller | Date: | Apr 23, 2010 8:18pm |
Forum: | texts | Subject: | Re: Is Adobe Flash going to be redundant? |
1, you and me are old, yes, it was great when we were young.
2, then all this technology came along, perfect digital copying, no more analogue copies of analogue copies or originals. Then the same technology allows ANYBODY to publish their works of art.
On the moving pictures archive there are people downloading PD stuff, then splitting up into clips, mixing together, new sound track and uploading as a new work of art.
3, you and me are fighting a lost cause, without working copy right laws, the quality of works of art is going downhill, and you Gerry must be aware that even publishers with legal departments are fighting a lost cause protecting their copy rights.
Result,
Publishers give up on copyright.
Authors will then no longer have the time to put into their works of art as they also have a full time job to earn money to live on, and for example Tom Clancy without copyright protection might still put the same research into a best seller, but take years longer to produce each best seller, with the result the junk books vastly out number the great books.
That would be a loss to society and to the future as Tom Clancy like the rest of us, has a limited use by date, a limited writing life before he gets too old.